In this page, we’ll
attempt to correct the errors and shortcomings of boththe official Archdiocesan periodical and the
Catholic Business Network’s bi-monthly publication.It will be updated as errors and omissions
become known.Remember – if you learn of
anything, please advise us!

“SENATORS
TAKE STAND FOR CHILDREN” – WHAT CHILDREN ??!?!??!

The front-page lead article
of the August 6, 2009 edition has the ridiculous title that is in quotes
above.One can say it is both ironic and
silly.Why?On that same day, the Senate voted to confirm
Sonya Sotomayor to the US Supreme Court.There is no doubt in the minds of any thinking persons (including
pro-abortion supporters!) that she will misuse her authority to ensconce in our
culture the legalized murders of unborn children.The three senators celebrated on the front
page – Susan Collins, George Voinovich and Joe Lieberman – all voted for
Sotomayor’s confirmation.In other
words, they literally threw millions of unborn children under the bus.Yet these three are being celebrated as
children’s heroes on the front page of an ostensibly Catholic publication?

Let’s look at a related
article in the online edition.This
version adds some other senators: Diane Feinstein, Robert Byrd and John
Ensign.There is also this comment from
Archbishop Wuerl:"This legislation
has put the District's most at-risk children first ... It is our hope that
Congress quickly passes SOAR. It is difficult to envision what advantage anyone
could find that would outweigh the futures and hopes of the young people in
this city." Last year 879 of the 1,700 Opportunity Scholars attended
Catholic schools in the District of
Columbia (from the article).

What about the District’s
most “at-risk children”, namely the ones who are daily aborted within the
District alone?Senator Lieberman is
quoted as saying that the bill is "not a liberal or conservative program -
it's a program that puts children first."Would that all children would be put first.However, with the exception of Senator
Ensign, all of the senators named above foster and foment the murders of millions
of children vis-à-vis abortion.We see
that over half the recipients of this aid attended Catholic schools.Is that why the Archdiocese licks the boots
of those who promote death?Notice
throughout this issue of the Standard that this scholarship program appears to
be the main topic of coverage.The
education of children is certainly laudable, but not at the price of the deaths
of innocent babies.Moreover, what kind
of “education” do these scholarship recipients receive when they see such
unabashed adulation of pro-abortion politicians?

Speaking of “boot-licking”, go
to the “Current Announcements” page to see how Support Our Aging Religious is prostituting
itself; this was announced in the same issue of the Standard.

“POSTER
CHILD” FOR CARITAS IN VERITATE – BILL GATES ??!?!??!

But of course this must be
correct!After all, this came straight
from the Catholic News Services, courtesy of the Catholic Standard!Right?Right?

At the bottom of page 11 of
the July 9 2009 issue, we are treated to this astonishing revelation from a
professor of a Jesuit university (aha!Doesn’t it figure?).The author
of this CNS piece then “informs” us that “The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
has donated billions of dollars for health and development programs worldwide,
as well as for education and housing programs in the United States.”

Well, let’s look at some of
these “health and development programs”, shall we?

In this link, we
read how the “wonderful” foundation cited above contributed millions to United
Nations population-control capers.We
also read from whom he received his propensity to giving to false charities.Apparently, Dear Old Dad “was head of the
Planned Parenthood.”Doesn’t that
explain a lot?We also read here how Bill
Gates contributed to the legalization of embryonic stem cell research in California.Now go to this
link, scroll to the May 25th item (second one down) and read how
he plans to reduce the world’s population by 11%.

Why does the so-called
“Catholic” News Service dignify the rantings of that Jesuit professor who calls
Gates the “poster child” for a papal encyclical?A close
read of Caritas in Veritate makes plain that reverence for human life is
foundational to any real social justice.The philosophy of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the very
antithesis of any true charity.

Because of its incessant
habit of presenting sheer nonsense as though it were Catholic truth, we will
redub the “Catholic News Services” as the Crackpot News Service.The Catholic Standard (and other diocesan
papers) would do well to sever their relationships with the Crackpot News
Service.

OBAMA
TRIES “COMMON GROUND” SCHTICK

Before we delve into the
topic above, we wish to publicize a 70-year old news story that just came to
our attention.Here goes.

1939 – Berlin

Prime Minister Adolph Hitler told a roundtable of
religious leaders that “there will always be solid differences regarding the
Jewish Problem, but that shouldn’t prevent the seeking of common ground to
reduce the extermination of Jews.”Der
Fuehrer has established a task force to seek such common ground.The religious leaders exulted at the good news.“Oh, how wondrous!” they exclaimed.“Instead of over 6 million Jews to be
exterminated, we’ll only have 1.5 million of them so murdered!The Chief Rabbis will be overjoyed!Oh, yip-yip-yippeeee!” they shouted, as they
bowed down to lick Der Fuehrer’s boots.

Doesn’t that sound like a
farce?Of course it is!However, if you take the above farce and
change a few details, such as substitute Obama for Hitler,
Washington for Berlin 1939 for July 2, 2009 and – of course
– unborn children for Jews, you see what was published on page 5 of the July 9th
edition of the Catholic Standard.Read
it here.The real farce is the cockeyed notion that we
can find “common ground” with stark evil.

The USCCB continues to
remain clueless, sad to say.Its
president, Francis Cardinal George, reportedly whined to Obama, "You've
given us nothing but the wrong signals on this issue. So, we'll see, but I'm
not as hopeful now as I was when he was first elected."Your Eminences and Your Excellencies, wake
up!Obama has been up front regarding
his lust for baby-killing; to his dubious credit, he has not sent “wrong
signals”!Rather, you have insisted on
interpreting his intentions through your own rarified, rose-colored
glasses.“We’ll see”, you say?What more do you need to see?He voted four times against the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban.He has rescinded the
Mexico City Policy.He has placed
Kathleen Sebelius over the HHS.He has
nominated a NARAL/NOW darling to the Supreme Court.Isn’t it clear that Obama is rabidly
pro-abortion?Now we must ask about this
“hope for his election.”What was the
source of this hope, given his clearly-stated positions?Did this misplaced “hope” seduce you to vote
for him this past November?

OBAMA’S
CAIRO SPEECH –
A “STEP TOWARDS PEACE”?

Not only are we dealing with
the Catholic News Service as being a less-than-Catholic news source, but now we
see in this piece some malfeasance of L’Osservatore
Romano, the Vatican newspaper.Some
background might be necessary to illustrate the latter’s loss of
credibility.Recall several months ago,
when in Brazil,
Archbishop José Cardoso Sobrinho pronounced excommunication on those who procured
an abortion for a young girl.L’Osservatore Romano published an
article by another “bishop” who criticized Sobrinho for, well, acting like a
true bishop.More recently, the Vatican newspaper asserted that Obama’s first 100 days "have
not confirmed fears of radical changes" on abortion policy.We know that is sheer nonsense.We can point to the rescinding of the Mexico
policy, millions of dollars going to the UN Population Fund, the danger to the
conscience clause.

The Standard article in question
can be found here.It’s really a CNS article, and echoes L’Osservatore Romano as it waxes lyrical
about the “new beginning in relations between the US and the Arab world” as it
“marked a break with the past” to use diplomacy, etc, etc.One wonders if this break with the past
involves the cessation of using children as suicide bombers, the renunciation
of the 9/11 attacks, extension of civil rights to Arab Christians and the
complete repudiation of that diabolical concept known as “jihad”.

An official with the Islamic
Cultural Center of Italy stated that “Obama has touched the right chords in the
hearts of Muslims..”Well, he may have
that right, and this affinity between Obama and the Muslims is not the result
of this Cairo
address only.When Obama was in Turkey on April 6, the Messianic Teleprompter
instructed him to let loose with “America is not a Christian, Jewish
or Muslim nation” (quote abbreviated).That point may well be arguable for current conditions, where the laws
of this country now countenance 3500 baby-murders daily, gay lifestyles,
bashing of Christians, etc.However,
only a fool would opine that Christianity was not at the heart of our nation’s
founding.

But wait!Did the Messianic Teleprompter have a short
circuit?Maybe so, for it contradicted
itself in Germany
on June 2nd.Obama declared
that because of the number of Muslims in this country,America could be considered “one of
the largest Muslim countries in the world.”Permit us to reconcile these two seemingly contradictory
statements.Assuming that they’re true
(which they’re not), that means that America is not Christian, Jewish or
Muslim, but then again, might be one of the largest Muslim countries in the
world.Do you have your brains wrapped
around that?

Let’s not forget one other
detail.All during the campaign, Obama
bristled at the mere mention of his middle name, Hussein.In fact, the politically correct wonks all
declared it to be racist to use the name that no one other than his parents
bestowed upon him.In the Muslim
countries, he emphasized his Muslim middle name.Hmmm….

Now could these little
facts, conveniently omitted by the CNS article, have helped to touch all those
right chords in Muslim hearts?Now what
do they do to your hearts?Is that the
kind of “peace” towards which we should be stepping?

If L’Osservatore Romano does not soon rediscover its Catholic mission,
it might find itself lining the floors of bird cages!

SCHOOL
NEWS (OR, “HOW TO SAY NOTHING IN ONE ENTIRE PAGE”)

The Standard’s June 11, 2009
issue, page 3, blew around a lot of hot air about the Catholic school policies
that are about to be unleashed upon the Archdiocese of Washington within the
next few months.For more on this, go to
our “Current Announcements” page and scroll to “Archdiocesan Parochial
Education in Possible Peril”.

Mark Zimmerman, the current
editor of the Standard, wrote this
particular piece.In the third
paragraph down, he states that the process commenced in October 2007 with a
convocation.Futhermore, he says that
“since that day, thousands of parents, educators, priests and parishioners have
been invited to participate in planning new policies for Catholic
schools..”Thousands??Ladies and gentlemen, it’s POLL TIME!Please let us know whether or not you were
one of those chosen “thousands” who were invited to participate in this effort
at webmaster@restore-dc-catholicism.com.If indeed you were invited, it doesn’t matter
if you accepted the invitation, it doesn’t matter what your general opinion was
(although you’re most welcome to elaborate).We just want to know how many (if any) actually received such an
invitation versus those who didn’t.If
indeed “thousands were invited”, odds are that there is at least one person in
the readership of this website who received such an invitation.After two weeks or so, we will publish the
numbers.

Moving on through this
article, we read that some of these policies are more complex than others.We also read that some policies may impact
other existing policies that may need to be modified or changed to be
consistent.Ladies and gentlemen, is
that clear – as mud, that is?Moreover,
guidelines and benchmarks will be developed for each policy area.My!Isn’t that lovely?Understand,
too, that “these policies…represent the best effort to strengthen and sustain
Catholic education in our schools into the future.”

We’re sure this tome about
the policies answers all questions about the future of Catholic education in
this archdiocese.Just one teeny, weensy
little question remains.Pray tell, what
are these wonderful policies??Well, go
back to our “Current Announcements” article.At the bottom, we link to two files; each contains one half of the draft
of the policies.For those of you who
were of the chosen “thousands”, we hope these look familiar – but we wouldn’t
be surprised if that is not the case!

STANDARD
PUBLISHES FLAWED ARTICLE REGARDING MICHAEL DIAZ

The Standard really should
cancel its contract with the (so-called) “Catholic” News Service.The pap pieces that pass for information are
colossal wastes of newsprint.On page 3
of the June 4th 2009 issue, they announce the nomination of Miguel
Diaz for ambassador to the Vatican.This is the 3rd or 4th
nomination that Obama has put forth; all the others were rejected by the Vatican,
for which we heartily congratulate the Holy Father.

So what else does the
Standard tell us about Diaz?He’s Latino
(would they make a big deal about nationality if he was Anglo?) and he is a
theologian.They quote Abbot Klassen of St John’sUniversity as saying about Diaz, “He is
a strong proponent of the necessity of the Church to become deeply and broadly
multicultural, to recognize and appreciate the role that culture plays in a
living faith.”Whoa!!This might be a proverbial “tipping of the
hand”!!

Now consider this.The Roman Catholic Church, established by
Jesus Christ Himself, is over 2000 years old.Holy MotherChurch has been found in
countless countries throughout the world.She has outlasted them all, and will continue to do so, for “the gates
of hell shall not prevail” against her.Since when must the Church become
multi-cultural?Moreover, who dictates
the “role that culture plays in a living faith”?Might we be hearing echoes of the Messiah
Most Miserable, trying to remake the Church into his own disgusting image and
likeness?Scroll down this page to the
article just below this, where we unpack the gobblygook that passed for Obama’s
commencement address at Notre Dumb…uh, we mean, Notre Dame!(ahem!)Specifically, look at the second paragraph.Recall how he said “we must bring our values
to align with demands of a new age”?When he’s consistent, he’s consistent!He seems to want to jettison the Teaching Magisterium, the Deposit of
Faith, to replace them with his own warped philosophies.

Now is he pro-life?Well, according to an unnamed White House
source, he is “clearly pro-life.”Well,
by golly!If the White House says so, it
must be so!Whew!We’re glad that is settled!Right?Right???Welll….maybe not!Recall the
events surrounding the nomination of rabidly pro-abortion Kathleen Sebelius as
Secretary of HHS.A gaggle of very
confused CINO leaders and theologians signed a statement supporting her nomination.Read it here.Look at the fifth signature!Yep!That’s our ambassador-nominee!That’s what the White House describes as “clearly pro-life”; however,
we’re not shocked by such cognitive dissonance anymore.

If the Vatican is wise, they’ll reject
this nomination, too.

STANDARD
PUBLISHES ERROR-LADEN CNS ARTICLE ABOUT OBAMA AT NOTRE DAME

This
appeared in the May 21, 2009 edition of the Catholc Substandard.Yes, this tripe
was written by the Catholic News Service (or so they call themselves), but the
Standard chose to run with this bileThere were awhole
host of other accounts that they could have chosen; why did they chose this
quasi-heresy?

Let’s look at some of the
most blatant nonsense – not all of it, lest we be here forever!First, Obama starts by saying that “we align
our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age.”Pardon our French, but he has it precisely
ass-backwards.Our values as Catholics
are based upon the Magisterium and thus based on the will of God.That means that they are immutable.Ladies and gentlemen, what Obama just spewed
forth is the heresy known as situational ethics.

He goes on, “no one person,
or religion, or nation can meet these challenges alone.”Here we have religious indifferentism.Ladies and gentlemen, we are Roman
Catholics.We have the Sacraments and
the full deposit of faith.That’s a
fact, despite the obfuscation of this Messiah Most Mawkish.

The above are quotes.This is a statement of the CNS author; “Obama
listed war, gay rights and embryonic stem-cell research among difficult issues
that demand dialogue..”Here he/she
seems to be in agreement with Obama, which makes us wonder how this author
retains his/her job at a Catholic agency.No, these issues don’t demand “dialogue”.Holy
MotherChurch
and natural law have both spoken plainly.What these issues demand is submission to God’s will as stated in Church
tradition.

Now the Presidential
Teleprompter must have had a momentary power surge, for there was this
admission of misdeed.“Obama said he had
learned to choose careful language on the issue during his race for the Senate
in Illinois,
when a pro-life doctor complained that his Web site referred to abortion
opponents as "right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right
to choose." Obama had the words removed.”Well, that’s nice; he had the words pulled.But how, oh how, did they come to be on that
web page in the first place?

Moving on, we read “Noting
he was not raised in a particularly religious household, he said he was
"brought to Christ" by the witness of co-workers in service on the
south side of Chicago and Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. Obama acknowledged
Catholic parishes helping fund an organization called the Developing
Communities Project.”Obviously he felt
it necessary to do homage to his buddies at ACORN.Of course we wouldn’t expect CNS to pick up
on that!

Those of you readers who
utilize news sources other than the mainstream media know that over 300,000
Catholics petitioned Notre Dame to be faithful to the USCCB statement on
“Catholics in Political Life”.Read here how
Father Jenkins stuck his thumb in the eyes of every American bishop.

Might there be a reason for
Father Jenkin’s obvious malevolence?Well, certainly his conscience and his pride have been stung by the
protests and public witness these past several weeks.But might
there be other reasons?Yep!It turns out that Father sits on the Board of
Directors of Millennium Promise, an organization that promotes contraception
and abortion in Africa.Our colleagues at CatholicCitizens.org
provide this
account.Now some of us thought that
we would try to contact Notre Dame’s board of directors to see if we could
elicit their help in getting the invitation to Obama rescinded.My!Weren’t we just the silly little geese!It turns out that a goodly percentage of that board is somehow in the
back pocket of the Obama cartel.Read this from
Pewsitter.They probably just giggled
and snickered as they had their secretaries blow off our phone calls.Well, we now know that alumni donations have
dropped by at least $14 million at the time of this writing.That cannot make for prolonged joviality –
unless they apply for some multi-billion dollar bailout, courtesy of our tax
dollars.

As we stated, a goodly
number of pro-lifers went to Notre Dame over the past few weeks; some were
arrested.We cannot help but note the
backwards priorities in how these Catholics (including some priests!) were
horribly treated, versus the obeisance and downright boot-licking that was
bestowed upon the Messiah Most Miserable.The saga is still far from over.Notre Dame should be stripped of its status as a Catholic institution.
Father Jenkins should be removed – or at least his priestly faculties should be
suspended.Both lie in the purview of
the South Bend Bishop D’Arcy.Moreover,
two men still remain in jail (update – all are out now, although legal/criminal
proceedings are on the horizon).Please
visit these sites:

If you need Lenten mortification, you're in luck - provided
you received the March issue of Our Parish Times!Therein lays many opportunities for weeping
and mourning - and letter-writing!

Chuck Short starts us on our lenten misery.We can count on him for such help in this
area.This month's screed deals with
"economic justice".He bemoans
the plight of the family racked by economic hardship - with no mention of the
even more fundamental hardships of contraception, abortion, divorce,
cohabitation, etc.He states that
"a new administration and Congress must steer our nation to safe
harbor."Well, Messiah Obama, Pope
Pelosi and cabal are steering this nation right off a moral precipice with
their abortion promotion (they're also doing a bang-up job of exacerbating the
economic problems with their stinkulus bill and other spending extravaganzas).

Moving on through the paper..

On page 7, Tom Sherman of St Raphael writes a
ridiculous piece about Lobby Night in Annapolis.(Perhaps that's because the topic itself is
inherently ridiculous)He goes on and on
about AIDS, homelessness, hunger, death penalty.He points out that "the primary advocacy
issue" is the death penalty.Now
what was NOT mentioned?We scoured that
article several times; we found no mention of abortion, marriage protection and
such.We prepared this flyer to illustrate how the death
penalty issue doesn't amount to a hill of beans compared to abortion.The Maryland Catholic Conference, and Mr.
Sherman, would do well to study it and the facts therein.

On page 18, entitled "Senior Resources",
why are we treated to a picture of a woman sitting in a lotus position,
obviously engaged in transcendental meditation?We can take some small comfort in that the NIH and not the Church is
promoting this nonsense (albeit with our tax dollars).An exploration of the NIH website reveals
usage of reiki, tai-chi, qi-gong.Ladies
and gentlemen, to dabble in these New Age practices is to flirt with inimical
spiritual forces.A Catholic paper
should be warning us of these dangers, not encouraging dalliances with
them.Read a bit of these dangers here.

We are pleased to note the
various references to pro-life activities in the parish.Since this is the issue of Our Parish Times
immediately following the January March for Life, we would have expected
them.Hopefully future issues will
continue to spread pro-life messages, along with fidelity to the Magisterium.That means that we hope they will omit the liberal
and New Age trash that was peppered throughout this issue.

FROM
OUR PARISH TIMES

This particular waste of
newsprint is found in the October edition of Our Parish Times, page 14.Msgr John Enzler, pastor of Blessed Sacrament
on Western Avenue,
wrote a column that directly contradicts what many bishops are correctly saying
about true Catholic priorities for the 2008 Presidential elections.Read it here.We emailed to him this letter to explain why his
column was erroneous and would most likely lead uninformed Catholics to
confusion about the election.In that
email letter, we noted some urls to websites that detail some clear thinking by
some of the US
bishops.Since that letter is a pdf, you
won’t be able to click on those links, so we’ll put them below, in the order in
which they appear in our letter.Click
on these to read some decent teaching.

Please spread
word of this site around, to educate voters of the true electoral picture.Please also use the Wisdom on Windshields flyer freely (discussed in “national news”).Educate any erring Church personnel.Time is short now.Alert us also.

IMPROVEMENT,
BUT OLD HABITS ARE HARD TO BREAK

Several articles caught our attention
in the Oct 9, 2008 issue.We are getting
close to the national elections.One
would have to be catatonic not to realize that this election will set the moral
direction for our nation for years to come.Deidre McQuade’s piece, “Abortion Is Always Opposed to the Authentic
Good of Persons” is actually quite good.We commend her for forthrightly stating that “Abortion is a pivotal
issue as we approach the upcoming elections” and “all issues do not carry the same
moral weight.”

On the opposite page from
that article is one by Nancy Frazier O’Brien entitled “Candidates’ Stands on
Life Cover More Than Abortion.”Oh,
my!Doesn’t that have a “seamless
garment” stench to it?Not surprisingly,
it comes from the Catholic News Service.You might recall several years ago the piece of cow-pie that they put
out entitled, “Apart from Abortion, Lieberman’s Views Are Compatible with
Church”, or something to that effect.The week following that putridity, the editor of the Standard issued an
apology after he was deluged with understandable anger from the
readership.Regrettably, this piece is
not too much better.In all fairness to
Ms. O’Brien, she does point out that both presidential candidates favor
embryonic stem cell research.Make no
mistake about it; embryonic stem cell research does fall into the category of
“intrinsic evil.”Were it not for the
candidates’ differing positions on other non-negotiable issues, this one issue
would make both unworthy of the vote of the serious, faithful Catholic.

However, Ms. O’Brien goes on
to place the issue of capital punishment on an equal par with abortion.Ladies and gentlemen, capital punishment is by no means an intrinsic evil.The late Pope John Paul II clearly stated
such in Evangelium Vitae.The article ends
with the discussion on capital punishment.Therefore, what do you think the average reader will remember?Because of the ending note, the reader will
only recall that Obama and McCain have similar views on capital
punishment.Can this be deliberate?The possibility does exist now, doesn’t
it?At best, Ms. O’Brien might benefit
from a discussion with Ms. McQuade, who wrote the vastly superior article, one
that more accurately echoes the Magisterium.

IMPROVEMENT!

We will give credit where it’s
due.We appreciate their reporting, in
the Oct 3rd issue, of the 40 Days for Life prayer that is currently
underway at the 16th
Street Planned Parenthood.This prayer ministry is part and parcel of a
nationwide effort to bring prayer and ministry in front of the death
centers.We thank and congratulate the
Standard for this reporting.

JAMES
P. GLEASON, SR – REQUIESCAT IN PACE

James P. Gleason, the first
elected Montgomery County Executive, passed away on September 14, 2008.There were write-ups in both the Washington
Post and the Gaithersburg Gazette the week after his death.They mention, with praise, his political and
civic accomplishments.What neither of
them mentions is his faithful pro-life activism in the later years of his
life.This web-mistress had the honor of
praying the Rosary alongside of him at the now-closed Hillcrest Women’s
Surgi-center on Georgia Avenue
in DC.He regularly came right up till
its long-awaited closing.The only hint
of his pro-life convictions that appeared in the Post was the request that
memorial donations be sent to Birthright of Wheaton.

Truth be told, we would not
have expected either the Post or the Gazette to mention Mr. Gleason’s pro-life
convictions.We would have expected
that, though, from the Catholic Standard.Frankly, we were surprised that there was no mention of Mr. Gleason’s
passing whatsoever in the September 18th edition of the
Standard.We found this amazing in light
of the fact that Mr. Gleason was a politically prominent Catholic.The Standard certainly carried on and on
regarding the recent death of Tim Russert.Some might argue that it was too soon to publish anything before going
to print.However, they glommed
immediately onto Mr. Russert’s death.Moreover, in this same issue appeared Hurricane Ike damage photos that
were dated September 14th, the date of Mr. Gleason’s death.Truly it’s a sad commentary when sectarian
and pro-abortion newspapers do a better job of reporting than does our official
local Catholic publication.

So why is there this curious
discrepancy between the silence regarding Mr. Gleason’s death, and the
excessive waling and teeth-gnashing that occurred upon Mr. Russert’s
death?Why?Could it be because Mr. Gleason, unlike so
many other Catholic politicians upon whom the Standard fawns, was a
Republican?Could it be because Mr.
Gleason’s faithful witness to the dignity of life puts to shame the conduct of
too many prominent Catholics, particularly those Catholics in public office and
in the Church structure itself?These
are questions that deserve serious answers.

We pray for the repose of
Mr. Gleason’s soul, and for consolation for his family.Furthermore, we ask Mr. Gleason for his
continued prayers, from his new vantage point, that the babies and mothers be
spared the ravages of abortion and that both our Church and country return to
sanity.

UpdateIn the September 25th
issue, there was a half-page article paying some tribute to Mr. Gleason.While we’re glad the Standard mentioned
something, the discrepancy in their treatment of the two men is still rather
astounding.Mr. Gleason received only a
half-page of one of the back pages.In
stark contrast, the mourning and lamentation for Mr. Russert covered almost 2 ½
entire issues.Moreover, there were only
the slightest hints of Mr. Gleason’s pro-life service: one phrase of one
sentence, and the mention of Birthright as the recipient for memorial
contributions.Why??

RUSSERT
AND RICHMOND

By now you’ve heard of the
latest Catholic Charities debacle, this one in nearby Richmond, VA
(If not, go to the “national news” section of this site).This one truly scrapes the bottom of the
barrel, for they have been found to be party to an abortion in January of
2008.Given the depth of moral depravity
in this instance, we might have hoped to have seen some mention of it in the
Catholic Standard.Alas, such did not
happen (in the June 26th edition).We’ve no reason to hope, given past performance, that any will
happen.We find this to be patently
dishonest and downright stupid.Surely
the Standard staff has to know that the Washington Times put it on one of their
front pages.In a word, whom do they
think they’re fooling?Meanwhile, we see
all kinds of happy-happy anecdotes about kids and priests getting awards.However, aside from the bios of the
newly-ordained deacons, there really is nothing of substance.

One colossal waste of space
has been all the coverage devoted to Tim Russert’s passing.Of course we pray for the repose of his soul
and for his bereaved family.I’ll say,
though, that during that same time, the father of friends of mine passed away
after a long illness.He and his family
raised eight children and was a faithful Catholic.How much coverage in the Standard did his
death garner?The same amount as did the
Richmond
situation – zilch, nada!Yet what was
the difference between the two men?It’s
painfully obvious, and painful because it reveals the priorities of the
Standard and the archdiocese that pulls its puppet strings.Russert was rich, famous and influential; the
other gentleman was not.

The June 19th
issue of the Standard was almost entirely devoted to the bewailing of Russert’s
death.I cannot recall a single page
that didn’t mention him at least once.I
suppose the June 26th issue was an improvement, since only half the
pages therein had Russert articles.Now
it is known that Russert, in the past, did work for the campaigns of both
Patrick Moynihan and Mario Cuomo – both pro-abortion Democrats.Did he ever renounce his promotion of
pro-abortion politics, however indirect such promotion might have been?We certainly hope so.Moreover, we hope that the Standard made
due-diligence inquiries into the same: although we strongly doubt it.

Our point, though, is not to
speculate on whether or not Russert was faithful to the Majesterium with
regards to life issues.Rather, we
deplore the Standard’s (and the archdiocese of Washington’s) rather unsavory proclivities
in fawning over powerful and prominent people simply because they are powerful
and prominent.Such does not seem to
reflect true Catholic standards (pun NOT intended!).

UPDATE!Rocks are
being overturned, and details are being unearthed.Yes, he did more than just work for Moynihan
and Cuomo.According to the Wanderer
(July 3rd edition), he tooktheir flagging primary campaigns and propelled them to victory.How, you may ask?By encouraging them to embrace the pro-abortion
position.You can read it here,
but you’ll have to subscribe to the online edition to read it (the article is
called “An Insider’s Take on Tim Russert”).Now why is this important, now that the man is dead?Two reasons: if this is true, and it probably
is, he has advocated abortion and may well have died in mortal sin.We don’t know that for certain, but there is
cause for concern, and need for much prayer.Second, in keeping with their dubious tradition of celebrating the rich
and famous Catholic (regardless of virtue, or lack thereof), the Archdiocese of
Washington has established (drum roll, please!) the “Tim Russert Memorial
Fund”!Ostensibly it’s a scholarship
fund of sorts, aimed no doubt at those celebrities who continue to wax lyrical
about Russert.Why, what better way to
express their admiration for their colleague by dropping a few thousand into
this worthy fund?

Seriously, the archdiocese
must be challenged on this.It is simply
not appropriate to establish any memorial of any sort for someone who may well
have advanced the culture of death.Christopher Manion of the Wanderer did excellent research.However, it was the duty of the archdiocese
to do their homework before establishing this memorial.

ANOTHER UPDATEWith all the
sad saga and sorry excuses that seem to be popping up like kudzu regarding the
Richmond/DiLorenzo scandal (see the “national news” section of this site), we’d
think that the Catholic Standard would see fit to mention it at least
once.Well, now the July 3rd
issue has arrived, and still there is not one word about it.The writers/editors at the Standard continue
to emulate the Three Monkeys.However,
there is progress in one aspect.The
lament regarding Tim Russert’s death is waning!This time, we only saw the back page devoted to the rehash.Perhaps by the time next week rolls around,
it will be all out of their system, and they can let the poor man rest in
peace.

HARRY
FORBES BLATHERS AGAIN

Harry Forbes, the USCCB
movie reviewer who made a laughingstock of himself after giving favorable
reviews to the poison contained in the movies “BrokebackMountain”
and the “Harry Potter” series, has done it again in the March 6, 2008 edition
of the Standard.The object of misplaced
adulation is “The Other Boleyn Girl”.Ostensibly, it’s a tale about King Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn and her
sister.We will not bore you with the
unedifying details of the movie; your own knowledge of Church history in England
will suffice.Forbes calls this “good
old-fashioned historical drama”.Well,
it’s more like modern, sordid, daytime soap operas!To quote, “the film contains royal bedroom
intrigue with nongraphic sexual encounters including rape, incest reference,
adultery, divorce, light sexual banter and innuendo and discreetly filmed
beheadings.It is acceptable for older
teens.”

We kid you not!The review actually makes those statements –
in that order!It is not acceptable for
anybody (How on earth does one talk about “discreetly filmed
beheadings”??!?!?).Oh, by the way – he
fails to mention in any way the resultant apostasy of England and the resultant
persecution of Catholics (We don’t think those persecutions were discreet at
all!), but we suppose insults to the Faith are no big deal to Mr. Forbes.At any rate, he gives the trash a rating of
A-III-adults.Is it time to make them
ashamed enough to rate that junk more appropriately?That was accomplished with the BrokebackMountain review!

HUMANAE
VITAE DISSENTER EULUGIZED IN THE STANDARD

Walter J. Burghardt, S.J.,
passed away February 16, 2008.His
eulogy appeared in the Standard.In it,
he was praised up and down and right and left for his social justice advocacy.There was mentioned, very briefly (very VERY
briefly) his public dissent against Humanae Vitae.He was quoted as saying that was a difficult
decision for him, that it “cost him dearly.”What screams the loudest is what was NOT said.No mention was made of any recantation, any
repentance on his part for disobedience to Pope Paul VI.We of Faithful Catholics of MD/DC hope that
he did indeed repent; else he may have found that his dissent cost him even
more dearly than he originally believed.May God have mercy!As for the
Catholic Standard, we wonder why they gloss over this dissent, a dissent that
more than besmirches all the other good that Father may have done.Again, the Standard should have implored the
prayers of all for this man’s repose, but it should never have sung his
praises.

TRANSGENDER
PANDERER EULUGIZED IN THE STANDARD

Montgomery County
Councilwoman Marilyn Praisner passed away on February 1, 2008.The Standard’s questionable eulogy (page 18
of the Feb 14th edition) starts with a headline describing her as
“woman who lived her faith as public servant”.We find one of her final votes to be quite at variance with Catholic
moral teaching.In November 2007, the
Montgomery County Council unanimously passed Bill 23-07, the Transgender
Identity Bill.Among other things, this
bill would allow cross-dressers the legal right to use public facilities that
are designated for the “gender of choice” at any given moment.This webmistress is aware of three occasions
when women went into ladies’ restrooms and found therein men in drag.All facilities – churches and schools
included – would be forced to accommodate perversion.No exceptions are allowed.Many good people are spending countless hours
trying to bring this bill to referendum – and to undo Ms. Praisner’s fine
public service!(Note: to aid in
restoring some semblance of sanity, please visit www.notmyshower.net to see how you can
assist!)

So why on earth does Mary
McGinnity (Director of the Archdiocesan Social Concerns Office) think that Ms.
Praisner’s public service was inspired by her faith (as stated in the
Standard)?Does Ms McGinnity not
realize that what Ms. Praisner did was to facilitate mortal sin?Whatever else Ms. Praisner’s support of that
bill may be, it was not based on inspiration by the Catholic faith.

Additionally we ask why the
Catholic Standard sees fit to sing Ms. Praisner’s praises?Yes, the woman has passed away, and by all
means we should pray for the repose of her immortal soul.But in no way should she be lionized in a
Catholic publication!

CONTROVERIES
– HUSHED AT THE STANDARD

On the front page of the
December 17th edition of the Washington
Times, the planned closing of HolyRedeemerSchool in northwest DC,
and the ensuing controversy, was detailed.In the issues of the Catholic Standard preceding and following the Times
article, not one peep was uttered about the closing.Now whatever one might think of the
particulars of this issue, all can agree that this matter constitutes
significant archdiocesan news and deserved mention in the official archdiocesan
news organ.Now why the cover-up?Is the Standard embarked on some futile
crusade to paint a false, “smiley-face” image of the archdiocese?In doing so, the Standard is only reinforcing
in the minds of intelligent Catholics the notion that it is merely a mouthpiece
of the chancery and not a true journalistic effort.It may even be committing sins of omission
against the Eighth Commandment.

One thing the Standard did
mention in its December 21, 2006 issue is that the Archdiocese of Washington is
paying out the paltry sum of $1.3 million dollars in sex abuse
settlements.Currently the article is on
their website at www.cathstan.org, but
should it mysteriously disappear from that website, you can see it here.Of particular note is Archbishop Wuerl’s
statement, "the funds are from insurance reserves; no funds have or will come
from the archdiocese's operating funds, Archbishop's Appeal, Forward in Faith
or parishes."He fails to mention
that those same insurance reserves originated from insurance premiums, paid by
the archdiocese, that ultimately had their source in the dollars that faithful
Catholics have been putting into the collection baskets.Of course no mention is made of the most
likely probability that now these insurance premiums are going to skyrocket
owing to this payout (and maybe more to come).Again – why the spin?

Not long after the sex abuse
scandals broke out, the archdiocese began a series of panel discussions to
(ahem!) “explain” what was happening to the parishioners.The first one was held at St. Raphael’s in Rockville.This session was attended by many people,
many from outside that parish – including this webmistress.Clearly it was an attempt to spin the focus
away from the gross sins of 1) homosexual behavior in the clergy and 2) the
sins of cover-ups on the part of the hierarchy.One of the “spin doctrines” was that stated by Archbishop Wuerl a few
weeks ago – verbatim!When one considers
that Archbishop Wuerl was not yet on the Washington
scene at the time of this panel discussion, we can see clearly “the party line”
that was being put forth, probably with orders from “on-high” – maybe the
USCCB?

The Catholics in attendance
at this session were very alert and articulate.They did an excellent job in refuting this propaganda, and others like
it.Clearly, this archdiocesan-picked
panel of “experts” was not prepared for honest challenge.This “first session” of panel discussions, to
the best of my knowledge, was also the last.Gee – makes you wonder why, doesn’t it?

Interesting “aside” to
consider – wouldn’t the $1.3 million have been put to excellent use to help the
beleaguered HolyRedeemerSchool?

Open
Letter to Father Peter Daly and Mark Zimmerman

These comments regard Father
Daly’s column in the April 13th edition of the Catholic
Standard.This particular issue was
devoted to the questions surrounding illegal immigration into the United States.Clearly this is an issue involving great
controversy.On the one hand, we wish
only the good of those immigrating to this country.On the other hand, we recognize that
sovereign states have not only the right but the obligation to control their
borders, if they are to fulfill their binding responsibilities to their
citizens.How these equally-valid
objectives are to be balanced is a question upon which good people may, and do,
disagree.The key concept here is that
while people disagree, they are still good.They do not deserve to be disparaged or vilified.Regrettably, in this regard, Father Daly and
the Catholic Standard have failed the Minutemen both in justice and charity.

It certainly is acceptable
that Father Daly disagrees with the Minutemen.However, it must be taken into consideration that the Minutemen are
simply decent people who are addressing the issue as they deem best; the means
they are exercising are perfectly legitimate.Father Daly had no moral right to label them as a “xenophobic group” and
no basis for claiming that they “know nothing about history, culture, religion,
justice and economics.”Who does Father
Daly think he is to sit in judgment of their faith and intelligence?Father Daly, in using such slanderous
language against good people, disgraced his Roman collar.He owes the Minutemen a public apology.

Equally inexcusable was the
decision by the editorial staff of the Catholic Standard to let that sort of
diatribe appear in a Catholic newspaper.For the life of us, we cannot fathom what induced the Standard to allow
what is arguably “hate speech” to be published.Indeed, we suspect that they would never allow such language to be used
against a Catholic politician who supports abortion; indeed, over the years,
several of them have been favorably portrayed in the Standard.Additionally, we believe that the editors of
the Catholic Standard would never allow any derogatory remarks against gay
priest-abusers to be published on their pages.Why then, did Mr. Zimmerman et al allow the Minutemen to be verbally
savaged in the pages of the Standard?The editors and management of the Catholic Standard showed deplorable
lack of professional and moral judgment in allowing Father Daly’s article to be
published as it was.

The entirety of this article
is being mailed/emailed to Father Daly and Mark Zimmerman at St. John Vianney
and the Catholic Standard respectively.It also appears on this website(www.Restore-DC-Catholicism.com)
because we know it will never be published (at least not in its entirety) in
theCatholic Standard.Indeed, ever since many good people wrote to
protest the Cardinal’s decision to allow pro-abortion Catholics to receive
Communion, the “letters to the editor” have all but disappeared.Any responses received (or lack thereof) from
these two gentlemen will likewise be published on this site.

To all other recipients:
please feel free to copy and distribute this; we ask, though that you do so in
its entirety and to make plain the source of this article.Additionally, you may wish to contact both of
them yourselves about this matter.

STRANGE SILENCE ON EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH On page 4 of the March 9, 2006 issue of the Standard
is an article regarding the so-called “Statement of Principles” signed by a
bunch of pro-abortion “Catholic” Democrats from the U.S. House of
Representatives.Having been quite
occupied by the struggle in the Maryland Senate over SB144 (regarding embryonic
stem cell research), this webmaster was somewhat flummoxed over the apparent
priorities of the Standard staff.The
Standard devoted almost a full page to the bloviation about these disobedient
Catholics, yet made no mention whatsoever about the efforts to keep embryonic
stem cell research at bay in Maryland.We saw no reason for that – until we recalled
the letter that we wrote to Cardinal McCarrick in September of 2004.In the 12th point of our letter,
we questioned Cardinal McCarrick how he could be comfortable with embryonic
stem cell research as performed by GeorgetownUniversity.Then in the 14th point, we voiced
our disappointment in His Eminence regarding his apparent suppression of
then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s instruction regarding the Eucharist and dissident
Catholics.With that in mind, we now
understand the thinking (or lack thereof) behind the priorities of this
issue.We also deplore them.